Kellerer, Wolfgang wrote:
> Dear All,
>
> I think the application class discussion we had is very important for
> a useful ALTO service. This poses two requirements: the ALTO server to
> understand application requirements and the ALTO client to understand
> the ALTO response.
>
> Let me try to summarize:
Wolfgang: Thanks for the summary -- that helps a lot.
This is a good discussion to have, please keep it going. One
important comment below:
> Not all of the information is mandatory, but we might consider a
> mandatory and an optional set.
>
> Do we have this in the current requirements? I think this is very
> important.
When we were working on the charter definition, we were (luckily)
prescient enough to recognize that different applications will
have different requirements. To that extent, I do want to
point out the following from our charter:
- A document defining core request and response formats
and semantics to communicate network preferences to
applications. Since ALTO services may be run by entities
with different level of knowledge about the underlying
network, such preferences may have different representations.
Initially the WG will consider: IP ranges to prefer and
to avoid, ranked lists of the peers requested by the client,
information about topological proximity and approximate
geographic locations. Other usages will be considered
as charter additions once the work for the initial services
has been completed.
Thanks,
- vijay
--
Vijay K. Gurbani, Bell Laboratories, Alcatel-Lucent
1960 Lucent Lane, Rm. 9C-533, Naperville, Illinois 60566 (USA)
Email: v...@{alcatel-lucent.com,bell-labs.com,acm.org}
Web: http://ect.bell-labs.com/who/vkg/
_______________________________________________
alto mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/alto
